Disposed

Bhunda Ram v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC17 Jan 2019CRLMP/288/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed for quashing of FIR alleging offences under IPC and SC/ST Act. Court granted direction for investigation with representation and limited protection from arrest requiring 15 days notice.

What did the court decide?

Direction to investigating authority to consider representation within ten days; grant 15-day notice before arrest; liberty to join investigation.

Bhunda Ram Vs State of Rajasthan — Writ and Judicial Review | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 288/2019

¶3

Bhunda Ram S/o Shri Raja Ram, Aged About 62 Years, By Caste Seervi, Resident Of Bagadinagar, Tehsil Sojat, District Pali.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶7

Smt. Kanku Devi W/o Parasmal, By Caste Sargara, Resident Of Village Alawas, Sojat Road, Pali.

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. LR Punia For Respondent(s) : Mr. VS Rajpurohit, Public Prosecutor

¶10

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶11

Order

¶12

17/01/2019

¶13

The petitioner has preferred this misc. petition under Section 482 of Cr. P.C. for quashing of FIR No.101/2018 lodged at P.S. Bagadi, District Pali for the offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 447 & 120-B IPC and Section 3(1)(f), 3(1)(g), 3(2) (v) of SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989.

¶14

The allegation against the present petitioner is that in furtherance of a conspiracy he executed a sale-deed on 20.7.2018 in favour of Khuma Ram and Uttam Chand. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner has shown land record/ Jamabandi of the Khasra No.2318 which is said to have been sold by the present petitioner-accused. A bare look at the Jamabandi reflects entry in Khasra No.2318 in favour of Bhunda Ram (present petitioner).

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner wants to submit a representation alongwith all the

¶16

(2 of 3)

¶17

[CRLMP-288/2019]

¶18

relevant documents before the concerned investigating authority to redress the issue.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor assures this Court that if the petitioner submits a representation along with all the necessary documents before the concerned investigating authority within a period of ten days from today, then the same shall be considered and decided strictly in accordance with law, before completing the investigation.

¶20

In light of the aforesaid assurance given by learned Public Prosecutor, the present misc. petition is disposed of with a direction to the concerned investigating authority that in case the petitioner submits a representation along with all the necessary documents before it within a period of ten days from today, then the same shall be considered and decided before completing the investigation, strictly in accordance with law and as per the assurance given by the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶21

In the peculiar facts of the case, it would be appropriate to grant protection from arrest to the petitioner as it will be a waste of energy and resources of the Police Department to run after the accused to complete the related investigation and without protection it would also cause un-necessary hardship to the accused, who deserves a basic opportunity of explaining his case before the Investigating Authority without fear of arrest. The Investigating Officer, however, shall have the liberty of custodial interrogation after giving 15 days’ notice before arrest if required. In the interest of justice and the facts and circumstances noted by this Court, the limited protection is justified. Therefore, if during the investigation, the concerned investigating authority needs to

¶22

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-288/2019]

¶23

arrest the petitioner, then the petitioner shall be given 15 days’ notice before making such arrest. The petitioner shall be required to join the investigation. The petitioner shall be at liberty to approach this Court again, in case need arises.

¶24

(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI)J.

¶25

Sanjay

Bhunda Ram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhunda Ram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Kanwar Vs State of Rajasthan

Rameshwar Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Lalit Gopal Vs State of Rajasthan

Suwalal Vs State

Pramila Vs State of Rajasthan

Lalita Vs State of Rajasthan